I have been playing and was curious why it is in the micro section?
Small stakes has only two levels , , while the rest have many.
Is it because you do not find it at casinos?
I dont see too many 100nl games live.
Is it because if you only one table it you cannot make much money?
Just caught my curiosity after seeing some bad answers in the micro forum to peoples 50nl questions. Yes there are some good answers do not get me wrong , but it just struck me as odd that it was grouped the way it is.

Idk. Honestly I think of $2-$25 as micro and $50-$200 as small.

It's because the blind is not $1.

Micro is the "cents" game.
Midstakes is the $1 single digit games.
High stakes is double digit (although I think people consider 5/10 more midstakes?)

Because the game texture, in general, has more in common with 25NL than 100NL

Because 50nl is micro stakes :P

Because 50NL has pretty much the same donks as 25NL except they have more money. Both 25NL and 50NL play almost exactly the same.

they didnt seem the same to me.

not the same imo...more 3betting and overall aggression at NL50. the regs also float your cbets more

I would guess because the big blind is under a dollar.

on stars 25nl is micro and 50nl is small stake

Small stakes are also single digit. But I like where you are going. Id say triple digit and above are nose bleeds.

Couldn't tell you. In fact Stars has 50NL and 100NL listed under small stakes. 25NL and under is under micro and 200Nl-600NL is under medium stakes.


I dunno ... lines have to be drawn somewhere. I think the line between 50NL and 100NL used to be bigger .... but whatever it's still alright. Just looking at table there is still a ****ton of 50NL tables with over 40% of players seeing the flop .... not so many at 100NL.

I feel that 50NL plays more like 100NL than 25NL personally. At least my results seem to suggest that.

It's just a name. Got to draw the line somewhere. Without those lines we'd be living in Anarchy. Is that what you want? Anarchy? What are you some kind of troublemaker?

Don't make me get my shot gun.

It's being used as a relative term. There are way more levels above nl50 than below, and by comparison to most of them, nl50 is a micro-stakes game. There will always be a dissenting opinion to this, because the 'real world' (aka the non-poker playing world) sees 50 dollars thrown on the table as a potentially high investment (to some) with a potentially high return or loss (to some). We are a part of this real world, and a lot of our predispositions conflict with the applied relativity of this term as it lies in the forum/poker communities.

Even within the community, Rolf Slotboom refers to a 100 max buy-in game as "micro" in his PLO book. I don't think Phil Ivey is going to categorize it any higher. It's all relative. If you understand the nuances behind adjusting to game flow, player tendencies, stack sizes, aggression, reads, what have you, it shouldn't matter what the blinds are too much.

cuz phil ivey makes the rules

cuz this has anything to do with the point at all in any way.

Could not disagree more.

Strange. Could not agree more o.O

its Micro because the blinds dont go over 1$ thus making it micro or small

why does it matter what it is called? money is money

because peoples ego's feel better calling 50NL small stakes instead of micro stakes i guess....

if it makes you feel better than call it small stakes

I have heard this advice in every jump in levels up to 200NL. Everyone says they are the same idiots with more money..not true

- every level players in general have more of a clue about the game, which makes it harder to beat
- the higher you jump the more aggressive, smart, tricky you opponents will be.
- However, there is not a huge jump in skill between the levels IMO. There are just more things you have to think about and incorporate into your game the higher you move up.